ORDER OF THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF THE
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS*

APRIL 16, 2013
CASE OF J. v. PERU**
HAVING SEEN:
1.
The brief of January 4, 2012, in which the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the
Court”), a case against the Republic of Peru (hereinafter “Peru” or “the State”) and offered
two expert opinions.
2.
The communication of January 19, 2012, in which the Commission requested the
substitution of one of the expert witnesses offered in its brief submitting the case, given
that the expert witness originally offered “would not be available to render [her] expert
opinion.”
3.
The brief of May 15, 2012, in which the representative of the alleged victim
(hereinafter “the representative”) submitted her brief of pleadings, motions and evidence
*

According to Article 19(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, “[i]n
the cases referred to in Article 44 of the Convention, a Judge who is a national of the respondent State shall not be
able to participate in the hearing and deliberation of the case.” In accordance with this provision, and pursuant to
Articles 19 of the Court’s Statute and 21 of its Rules of Procedure, Judge Diego García-Sayán, a Peruvian national,
did not participate in the processing of this case. Therefore, in accordance with Articles 4(2) and 5 of the Rules of
the Court, Judge Manuel E. Ventura Robles, Vice President of the Court, assumed the acting Presidency in this
case.
**

At the request of the alleged victim, the full Court, during its 96th Regular Period of Sessions, ruled that
the identity of the alleged victim be kept confidential. Therefore, the Court and its President shall identify the victim
as “J”. The Court also decided to extend this confidentiality to the statements or information that any of the parties
might make public on the case. Also, the Court ordered that, “in view of the facts alleged in this case, the
confidentiality of the identity of the alleged victim not only implies the confidentiality of his or her name, but also of
any sensitive information contained in the file on the alleged sexual violence, whose publication could affect the
right to privacy and personal integrity of the alleged victim.” This decision was notified to the parties and to the
Commission through the notes of the Secretariat of the Court of September 10, 2012.

Select target paragraph3